its- ok - in fact, better than ok.

I just wish that we gave consideration to patrick ewing. He has actually been working at becoming a coach. I view Mark has having been an announcer - which isn't the same thing.

He might work out- I'd prefer to reward hard work - and that is the route patrick has taken.

Jax is a PG and PG's seem to make good coaches in the NBA (just like catchers in baseball.) Now obviously Jax has no coaching experience but just by listening to him during his broadcasts, the way he breaks things down it seems like he knows what he's talking about, this is of course in addition to the way he was a leader on the floor during his playing career. This team isn't going anywhere for the next few years so we can hire Jax with no expectation and see where it goes. If he sucks, fine, we'll lick our wounds and when 2010 comes around we can go for a big name coach. I feel it's worth the shot.

I think he'll do just fine, he'll have 2 years to figure things out and by the time 2010 comes, we'll hopefully have some capspace and the chance to have a solid young team, a young team that grew with their rookie coach.

I think adding Jax was good, but i went with #2 bacause that reflects the way i feel more than the other 2 choices. Whenever you bring Mark Jackson into your organization thats a good thing. And the bigger role you give him the better imho.